m2_import_file

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly discloses that the file is read and evaluated, that new/updated definitions become available immediately, that no restart is needed, and that re-importing redefines symbols. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by behavioral details and a clear Args section. The Emacs analogy adds helpful context without bloating the text, though it could be trimmed slightly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides enough information about what the tool does, how it behaves, and what the parameter means. It does not discuss failure modes or return values, but the output schema handles return-value expectations and the operation is straightforward.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the schema only names the parameter 'path' as a string. The description compensates fully by specifying that path is an ABSOLUTE path to the .m2 file to import, adding essential semantic meaning for correct invocation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool imports a local .m2 file into the persistent session and evaluates its contents, which is a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like m2_run_script or m2_load_package, but the persistent-session framing and Emacs load analogy give enough differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the intended use case: when you need to load a .m2 file into the running session without restarting. It does not state when to avoid this tool or explicitly name alternatives, so the usage guidance is present but only implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.